Ring of Steel: Fare Gates at BOS, BON, & BBY

[Arlington]

I would like the gates to also require exit validation--passing in either direction should require an active fare. This is how all London CR works.

[RenegadeMonster]

Eventually they will be doing that. But we are years away from that.

[Rbts Stn]

Just to make clear, my commuter rail ride *is* a Zone 2 ride. I don't evade or underpay fares, but if they aren't going to collect, I'm not activating for the manual check they occasionally do at South Station.

[Arlington]

Flashing a paper Zone2 ticket that you do not intend to use so as to avoid activating a Zone2 mTicket, in the expectation that you'll only be asked to activate on 80% of rides is textbook exmple of a fare evasion plan for 20% of rides.

The app asks you to activate your ticket before boarding. Choosing to not activate the ticket in 20% expectation that it will not be inspected is the same as jumping an invisible turnstile.

Apparently there is enough such fare evasion to fund the installation of gates that ensure single-use tickets are presented on only one day, and that m tickets are activated before boarding as the app requests.

[Arlington]

If I were a Keolis analyst, I'd probably have a really good estimate of how much "show paper Ticket, don't activate mTicket" is going on. There are lots of good inputs to the model:
mTicket apps that are opened each rush hour, have a ticket, but ticket isn't activated each rush hour
Location/movement of the phone at noon and midnight (showing that the phone commutes in/out every day)
Number of activations per week per app of a user who does not buy passes.

In general, at "commute times" showing a paper ticket or even a single use is probably a leading indicator of fare evasion.

I would expect paper ticket sales to go up* and pass sales to go up after the gates go in.

*The fare-beater sales go down, but other kinds of compliance goes up.

[Arborwayfan]

Rbts Stn, do you have some kind of moral reasoning going on here that if "they" don't always make it through the train, it's wrong to expect you to pay? (I feel like I hear you saying Keolis is negligent at fare collection so it's somehow unfair to expect you to pay, but I'm not sure that's what you mean. I don't think I hear so saying you cheat because you can.) And would you feel differently about a proof-of-payment system with big fines for anyone without a ticket when they got caught by the occasional random inspector? I'd be curious to see your reasoning. I'd also be curious to know -- which we can't, without a big survey -- how many other passengers feel the same way.

[danib62]

Flashing a paper Zone2 ticket that you do not intend to use so as to avoid activating a Zone2 mTicket, in the expectation that you'll only be asked to activate on 80% of rides is textbook exmple of a fare evasion plan for 20% of rides.

The app asks you to activate your ticket before boarding. Choosing to not activate the ticket in 20% expectation that it will not be inspected is the same as jumping and invisible turnstile.

Apparently there is enough such fare evasion to fund the installation of gates that ensure single-use tickets are presented on only one day, and that m tickets are activated before boarding as the app requests.

I mean if he never brought the app into the equation and just always paid using paper tickets he'd be paying his fare just as often so I don't see the issue.

In general, at "commute times" showing a paper ticket or even a single use is probably a leading indicator of fare evasion.

That's a funny joke.

[danib62]

I think what bugs me about this system is that it seems like it is so half-assed. I'd like to see one of three options:

• Keeping the current open system and taking the $10m construction costs and $7m/yr annual operating cost and hiring more asst conductors and/or fare inspectors

• Switching to a completely closed system

• Switching to a full POP system with tap on/tap off readers at every station with fare inspectors conducting random inspections and handing out heavy fines

This half open, half closed hybrid just seems to be highly flawed. Why reinvent the wheel?

[Patrick Boylan]

Rbts Stn, do you have some kind of moral reasoning going on here that if "they" don't always make it through the train, it's wrong to expect you to pay?

My moral reasoning is that if "they" don't make it through the train then whoever has a ticket would not have paid, so what makes them deserve a free ride more than me, just because I sat somewhere that the fare collector was able to reach me? If you were riding and didn't get your ticket collected would you rip it and throw it away? If you would in that same situation save the ticket to use some other time, yet question someone's moral reasoning, what does that make you?

[Arborwayfan]

Mr. Boylan, I'm not questioning anyone's moral reasoning, not saying it's bad. I'm asking about it, because Arlington basically said Rbts Stn was evading the fare in an immoral way but Rbts Stn pretty clearly didn't see it that way and seemed maybe to think that Keolis was on weak moral ground, and I wanted to understand what they were thinking. Your thought on the subject is pretty sensible.

[Arlington]

I did not offer a moral judgment either.
Evading a fare is fare evasion
Evading a fare is any active strategy that results in a trip taken and a fare not paid

Not activating an mTicket before boarding in the practical hope that the ticket won't be inspected is an activity that results in a trip taken and a fare not paid. Ergo it is an example of fare evasion.

Fare evasion is believed to be extensive.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that a "show your media" perimeter was not sufficient and was easily subverted by showing a paper ticket that would not actually be cancelled on the trip.

And that a "scan your media" perimeter that assures "ticket use" offers 3 hours of unlimited entry/re-entry solves a lot of fare evasion scenarios

[danib62]

Arlington, in your opinion is it fare evasion if someone chooses to only purchase paper tickets knowing they’ll be less likely to be collected?

[charlesriverbranch]

Arlington, in your opinion is it fare evasion if someone chooses to only purchase paper tickets knowing they’ll be less likely to be collected?

I use paper tickets because I don't have to fumble with my phone or worry about it running out of battery.

[Trinnau]

Arlington, in your opinion is it fare evasion if someone chooses to only purchase paper tickets knowing they’ll be less likely to be collected?

Based on what he said yes. Anytime you ride for free it is a form of fare evasion. The only way to not evade a fare is to have paid for every trip you take.

So if one buys a paper ticket and the conductor does not come through the paper ticket is still valid. It is that next ride where the fare is "evaded" in part because the conductor did not invalidate the ticket thus forcing the individual to purchase a fare the next time, but also in part because the ticket holder is taking advantage of that situation for personal gain at the expense of the MBTA. A truly, 100% moral person would indeed self-cancel that ticket by disposing of it and purchase a new fare for their next trip, instead of re-using the same ticket to ride without paying a new fare. But most people I know would think "Oh great! Free ride!" and think nothing of using it again. They aren't breaking a rule per se because they are riding with valid fare media, but they are deliberately choosing to take a service twice that they only paid for once.

[danib62]

I wonder if takes the bus and the farebox is broken if he mails the T a check...